 | |
"Kimi" Sulks
Formula 1 Formula 1 motor racing discusions (rec.autos.sport.f1)
 |
| | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
#21
 
| |||
| |||
|
Re: "Kimi" Sulks -
05-15-2007
, 06:25 AM
|
Luigi Topolino <tifoso (AT) mindspring (DOT) com> wrote: Bzzzt. Not the case. It broke, all on its own. And judging by the panicking going on in the Ferrari pit just afterward, The Chimp was lucky his didn't break too. Electronics don't 'just break'. Putting aside the fact that they very much do "just break" (you own a PC, right?), |
unsecured connectors back out due to heat cycles, device structures
fail due to radiation, but they don't "just break".
Quote:
|
electronics was just a smokescreen excuse. The failure was elsewhere. You and I both saw the close-up of the cracked front steering arm fairing. We also both saw Kimi's car suddenly twitch dangerously and run wide into the lefthander. |
--
"...Luigi follow only the Ferraris."
#22
| |||
| |||
|
|
Luigi Topolino wrote: On Sun, 13 May 2007 19:35:53 +0100, Horse With No Name danz (AT) noname (DOT) net> wrote: John Smith wrote: Speed TV actually jinxed KR today with a segment that was talking about how he had problems finishing races for McLaren and now that he has a Ferrari things would be different. I say bring on the conspiracy theorists, MS's 1st race and KR's car suddenly has an electrical problem.. Seems fishy! I thought so too - fishy, I mean. That's right... A two-car budget of 500Billion with 500million to Paris just to drive*, and they're going to sabotage his car. You realise that's exactly what you suggested had happened when Massa's car broke, right? |
--
"...Luigi follow only the Ferraris."
#23
| |||
| |||
|
|
Luigi Topolino <tifoso (AT) mindspring (DOT) com> wrote: Oh my! How droll! The latin driver as monkey jape, smashing old boy! Jolly good sport that! Monkeys, penguins... kif-kif. |
hardly the equivalent to the systemic ignorance, virulence and hatred
behind generations of "monkey" and "jungle boy".
--
"...Luigi follow only the Ferraris."
#24
| |||
| |||
|
|
Luigi Topolino wrote: On Sun, 13 May 2007 19:35:53 +0100, Horse With No Name danz (AT) noname (DOT) net> wrote: John Smith wrote: "Luigi Topolino" <tifoso (AT) mindspring (DOT) com> wrote in message news:k0ce43tvgigsso2qtpj7i41jvckudogjqi (AT) 4ax (DOT) com... All you need to know about "Kimi" Raikkonen: After trashing his excellent car even before the first pitstop, "Kimi" departed the circuit during the race, declining to participate in the post race debriefings. Not that the "input" of a shiftless drunk would be of any value, but it could serve to bolster the team's faith in his dedication. [LOFL] "Kimi" will never be Driving Champion. and he is throwing away the Constructors Championship chances for Ferrari with dissolution and slovenly work ethics. They should replace him with a monkey. ...At least you can teach sign language to a monkey. It seems to be working with Massa.. Oh my! How droll! The latin driver as monkey jape, smashing old boy! Jolly good sport that! [Sigh] Speed TV actually jinxed KR today with a segment that was talking about how he had problems finishing races for McLaren and now that he has a Ferrari things would be different. I say bring on the conspiracy theorists, MS's 1st race and KR's car suddenly has an electrical problem.. Seems fishy! I thought so too - fishy, I mean. That's right... A two-car budget of 500Billion with 500million to Paris just to drive*, and they're going to sabotage his car. You fuckwits sure your parents aren't cousins? You're such a prick, you must be the only one in this NG in more killfiles than me. |
sibling-parents.
--
"...Luigi follow only the Ferraris."
#25
| |||
| |||
|
|
On Mon, 14 May 2007 09:51:11 +0100, Phil Newnham <pnewnham (AT) yahoo (DOT) com wrote: Luigi Topolino wrote: On Sun, 13 May 2007 19:35:53 +0100, Horse With No Name danz (AT) noname (DOT) net> wrote: John Smith wrote: Speed TV actually jinxed KR today with a segment that was talking about how he had problems finishing races for McLaren and now that he has a Ferrari things would be different. I say bring on the conspiracy theorists, MS's 1st race and KR's car suddenly has an electrical problem.. Seems fishy! I thought so too - fishy, I mean. That's right... A two-car budget of 500Billion with 500million to Paris just to drive*, and they're going to sabotage his car. You realise that's exactly what you suggested had happened when Massa's car broke, right? ...You *are* too dumb to get mockery? |
double standards.
--
Phil
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tmc1979/
#26
| |||
| |||
|
|
On Mon, 14 May 2007 10:53:38 +0200, address (AT) in (DOT) sig (ric zito) wrote: Luigi Topolino <tifoso (AT) mindspring (DOT) com> wrote: Oh my! How droll! The latin driver as monkey jape, smashing old boy! Jolly good sport that! Monkeys, penguins... kif-kif. The mocking nonsensical reference to flightless Arctic waterfowl is hardly the equivalent to the systemic ignorance, virulence and hatred behind generations of "monkey" and "jungle boy". |
Yours is just wrapped up pretending to be pretty.
--
Phil
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tmc1979/
#27
| |||
| |||
|
|
Luigi Topolino wrote: On Mon, 14 May 2007 10:53:38 +0200, address (AT) in (DOT) sig (ric zito) wrote: Luigi Topolino <tifoso (AT) mindspring (DOT) com> wrote: Oh my! How droll! The latin driver as monkey jape, smashing old boy! Jolly good sport that! Monkeys, penguins... kif-kif. The mocking nonsensical reference to flightless Arctic waterfowl is hardly the equivalent to the systemic ignorance, virulence and hatred behind generations of "monkey" and "jungle boy". You're wrong there. |
Phil
--
"Home taping is killing big business profits. We left this side blank
so you can help." -- Dead Kennedys, written upon the B-side of tapes of
/In God We Trust, Inc./.
#28
| |||
| |||
|
|
On Mon, 14 May 2007 08:02:16 +0200, address (AT) in (DOT) sig (ric zito) wrote: Luigi Topolino <tifoso (AT) mindspring (DOT) com> wrote: Bzzzt. Not the case. It broke, all on its own. And judging by the panicking going on in the Ferrari pit just afterward, The Chimp was lucky his didn't break too. Electronics don't 'just break'. Putting aside the fact that they very much do "just break" (you own a PC, right?), No, they don't. Components fail due to thermal or mechanical shock, unsecured connectors back out due to heat cycles, device structures fail due to radiation, but they don't "just break". |
(whether they be thermal or mechanical, we'll assume acoustic isn't an
issue) or if they have, then they're unable to design a car to withstand
them.
Quote:
|
electronics was just a smokescreen excuse. The failure was elsewhere. You and I both saw the close-up of the cracked front steering arm fairing. We also both saw Kimi's car suddenly twitch dangerously and run wide into the lefthander. So, he hit something and trashed his car yet again, big surprise. |
--
Cheers
Graham
Make a little birdhouse in your soul...
#29
| |||
| |||
|
|
Luigi Topolino wrote: On Mon, 14 May 2007 08:02:16 +0200, address (AT) in (DOT) sig (ric zito) wrote: Luigi Topolino <tifoso (AT) mindspring (DOT) com> wrote: Bzzzt. Not the case. It broke, all on its own. And judging by the panicking going on in the Ferrari pit just afterward, The Chimp was lucky his didn't break too. Electronics don't 'just break'. Putting aside the fact that they very much do "just break" (you own a PC, right?), No, they don't. Components fail due to thermal or mechanical shock, unsecured connectors back out due to heat cycles, device structures fail due to radiation, but they don't "just break". So the engineers either haven't properly measured the loads in testing (whether they be thermal or mechanical, we'll assume acoustic isn't an issue) or if they have, then they're unable to design a car to withstand them. |
It is easy to do this, they just need to make it out of a great chunk of
steel. The challenge in F1 is to make something that is strong enough to
stand up to an F1 race, but no more - if it is stronger than this, it
was overengineered - meaning that it would have been unnecessarily heavy
and reduced performance unnecessarily - a good way to not succeed in F1.
If drivers differ in the loads they place on a car, then the ideal
solution would be to build two different cars taking into account the
driver differences. On the other hand, you certainly wouldn't want to
build a stronger car for both, as the gentler driver would then lose
performance with no advantage - and the reason the gentler driver would
need a lighter car would be to compensate for them nursing the car
rather than being more aggressive.
In short, F1 represents tradeoffs and it isn't a simple matter to solve
these tradeoffs without erring too far in one direction.
Quote:
|
electronics was just a smokescreen excuse. The failure was elsewhere. You and I both saw the close-up of the cracked front steering arm fairing. We also both saw Kimi's car suddenly twitch dangerously and run wide into the lefthander. So, he hit something and trashed his car yet again, big surprise. Clearly his stress analysis skills are below par... |
#30
| |||
| |||
|
|
Graham Hodgson wrote: Luigi Topolino wrote: On Mon, 14 May 2007 08:02:16 +0200, address (AT) in (DOT) sig (ric zito) wrote: Luigi Topolino <tifoso (AT) mindspring (DOT) com> wrote: Bzzzt. Not the case. It broke, all on its own. And judging by the panicking going on in the Ferrari pit just afterward, The Chimp was lucky his didn't break too. Electronics don't 'just break'. Putting aside the fact that they very much do "just break" (you own a PC, right?), No, they don't. Components fail due to thermal or mechanical shock, unsecured connectors back out due to heat cycles, device structures fail due to radiation, but they don't "just break". So the engineers either haven't properly measured the loads in testing (whether they be thermal or mechanical, we'll assume acoustic isn't an issue) or if they have, then they're unable to design a car to withstand them. But F1 has never been about building something as reliably as possible. It is easy to do this, they just need to make it out of a great chunk of steel. The challenge in F1 is to make something that is strong enough to stand up to an F1 race, but no more - if it is stronger than this, it was overengineered - meaning that it would have been unnecessarily heavy and reduced performance unnecessarily - a good way to not succeed in F1. If drivers differ in the loads they place on a car, then the ideal solution would be to build two different cars taking into account the driver differences. On the other hand, you certainly wouldn't want to build a stronger car for both, as the gentler driver would then lose performance with no advantage - and the reason the gentler driver would need a lighter car would be to compensate for them nursing the car rather than being more aggressive. In short, F1 represents tradeoffs and it isn't a simple matter to solve these tradeoffs without erring too far in one direction. |
around the $15m driver? Sorry, but Ferrari got Kimi to win the
championship because they felt Massa wasn't up to it (rightly or
wrongly). So why would they then design the car around Massa - they
wouldn't. It'd be Massa who has to compromise with a "heavier" car, if
he is indeed lighter on the equipment than Kimi. The point still stands,
they've not worked out how to design a car for him yet. Either the
management cocked up in getting Kimi, or the engineers are cocking up in
not engineering a car that can withstand his style.
--
Cheers
Graham
Make a little birdhouse in your soul...
|
« Previous Thread
|
Next Thread »
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
Linear Mode
| |
Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.